U.S. Manufacturers Sometimes Seek China Alternatives.

"Fears of military conflict and increasing security worries have some U.S. manufacturers re-evaluating their reliance on China.

Executives are plotting alternate supply chains or devising products that can be made elsewhere should China's hundreds of thousands of factories become inaccessible. That prospect became more conceivable, they said, after the 2022 events in Ukraine prompted companies to sever ties with Russia, sometimes taking huge write-downs.

U.S. companies were further rattled after Chinese authorities recently questioned workers at Boston-based consulting firm Bain & Co. and raided the Beijing offices of Mintz Group, a due-diligence firm based in New York. The government has also barred major Chinese firms from buying products made by U.S. semiconductor company Micron Technology, citing national-security risks.

Foreign companies have had issues in China for years, but the growing tensions have unnerved businesses like Grey Duck Outdoor.

The Minnesota-based watercraft maker contracts with Chinese factories to produce paddleboards, taking advantage of the country's low costs and efficiency.

Owner Rob Bossen said all of his paddleboard suppliers, including companies that make foam, resins and injection-molded plastics, operate within a few miles of each other in the Shenzhen area. Bossen has good relations with his business partners, he said, but events in Ukraine caused him to imagine what might happen if a similar disruption takes place in China.

"There's risk to having all your eggs in the China basket," he said.

Companies like Grey Duck are in a bind, industry officials said. China's access to raw materials and ability to produce components for finished goods remains unmatched, and its dense supplier networks have yet to be replicated elsewhere.

China accounts for 31% of global manufacturing, according to the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, nearly twice the 17% share of the U.S. It is also an important market for many U.S. companies.

Some executives say that the business interests of the U.S. and China remain aligned. According to China's foreign ministry, Elon Musk said during a trip to China this week that the countries' economies shouldn't be decoupled. Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook said during a March visit that Apple and China have helped each other grow over recent decades.

PPG, a Pittsburgh-based paint-and-coatings company, has 15 factories and about 4,000 employees in China. Almost all of the products made there are used there, putting China in the top three countries for PPG sales, CEO Tim Knavish said.

The company has strategized about how to take appropriate action in China if needed, Knavish said. PPG last year took a $290 million write-down on most of its Russia business after Ukraine events.

Knavish said PPG is being extra cautious with its intellectual property and data within China. A revised espionage law allows authorities there to inspect a company's facilities and electronic equipment.

"We're not putting our head in the sand here," he said. "We see what's going on, and naturally it's very concerning to us. We're being extremely prudent about any additional investments that we make in China."

Dan Harris, an attorney who advises companies doing business in China, said other executives remain blase about the possibility of being targeted by authorities.

"It's very difficult to care about a raid on the Mintz Group when you can have your widgets made in China for 15% less and it'll cost you a fortune to move," he said.

Mintz has said the firm is licensed to operate in China and follows the law there. Bain has said it was cooperating with Chinese authorities. A representative of the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C., said authorities had carried out "normal law enforcement actions" meant to safeguard national security and development interests.

"Foreign companies and their products are welcome to the Chinese market as long as they abide by Chinese laws and regulations," the spokesman said.

Harris sees other bad omens, such as a court system that he said has become increasingly unfriendly to U.S. companies. Some businesses are plotting a departure, he said, but are finding no easy equivalent to their setups in China. Vietnam, for example, has become so popular that manufacturing space is now hard to find, he said.

David Alexander of Florida-based Baysource Global, which connects American companies with Asian contract manufacturers, said it remains "business as usual at the factory level" within China, though companies looking to set up new ventures are now considering other destinations instead of defaulting to the country.

"It's politics on both ends that are really impacting all the rhetoric," he said. "These factories still need to stay in business."

Ventilator company CorVent Medical relies on Chinese plants for the stamped sheet metal, microblowers and other components that go into its products. But CEO Richard Walsh said that process hasn't always gone smoothly.

Substitute parts sometimes get into the supply chain, he said, which is a problem when a product needs the authorization of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. CorVent once received 1,300 bag valve masks that weren't FDA-approved, and thus couldn't use them. The company ended up donating them to a Ukrainian relief group, Walsh said.

That headache came on top of spiraling costs and shipping that stalled during Covid-related logjams. CorVent is opening its own factory in Fargo, N.D., to assemble the ventilators, but with 60% to 70% of the parts coming from China, Walsh said it would likely take years to switch to domestic sources.

CorVent is trying to assemble that supply chain with help from the Reshoring Initiative, a nonprofit that advocates for the return of U.S. manufacturing jobs. The company is braced for higher prices and slower service than it receives in China, but Walsh said medical devices such as ventilators are too important to be cut off by the threat of war or a trade embargo.

"The quicker we can get away from the Chinese components the safer we'll all be," Walsh said.

Grey Duck is seeking to blunt its China exposure with new products made in the U.S. It has begun making canoes in a facility near the Twin Cities, and Bossen said he might add other domestically produced watercraft to the lineup.

The ease of manufacturing in China is prompting Bossen to stick with the country for his paddleboard production. Though he has grown leery of China's surveillance practices, such as hotels that take photos of guests during check-in, he said he would probably visit again.

"When you're boots on the ground there, you get a feel for the factory's health and the general business health of the people you're working with," he said." [1]

1. U.S. Manufacturers Seek China Alternatives. Keilman, John. 
Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]. 01 June 2023: B.1.

 

 

2024 m. kandidatai į JAV prezidento postą stoja į kovą prieš administracinę valstybę

„Iškylantis 2024 m. prezidento rinkimų klausimas: kas nužudys federalinį leviataną? Žvėris vadinamas kitu vardu – administracine valstybe – ir pagrindiniai varžovai vis dažniau savo kampanijose jį iškelia į priekį ir į centrą.

 

     Savo „Twitter Spaces“ pristatyme kartu su Elonu Musku Floridos gubernatorius Ronas DeSantis pažadėjo „atstatyti vykdomąją valdžią ir nuversti administracinę valstybę“. Demokratų kandidatas Robertas F. Kennedy jaunesnysis savo kandidatūrą į Baltuosius rūmus pradėjo, sakydamas, kad „paims CŽV ir suskaldys ją į tūkstantį dalių bei išblaškys vėjams“. Verslininkas Vivekas Ramaswamy turi drąsų pasiūlymą panaikinti visas federalinių darbuotojų apsaugos priemones. Pirmosiose 2024 m. ciklo kalbose Donaldas Trumpas teigė, kad yra geriau, nei jo oponentai pasirengęs 2025 metais „išrauti gilią valstybę“, nes per pirmąją kadenciją pasimokė iš personalinių klaidų.

 

     Tai, kas kažkada buvo neaišku, tapo akivaizdu: prezidentai šiandien vykdo tik dalį vykdomosios agentūros kontrolės, kurią atliko Franklinas D. Rooseveltas, kai su Kongresu sukūrė mūsų modernią vyriausybę. Anthony Fauci skatinami „Covid“ užblokavimai ir neseniai atskleistas vyriausybės ir socialinės žiniasklaidos platformų koordinavimas, siekiant cenzūruoti tai, ką jie savavališkai laikė „dezinformacija“, yra švieži visų žmonių mintyse. 

 

Tai, kad šie biurokratai vykdė savo darbotvarkę, o ponas Trumpas neva juos kontroliavo, įrodo, kad kol nepataisysite administracinės valstybės, nėra garantijos, kad vykdomosios valdžios politika atspindės prezidento požiūrį.

 

     Problema ta, kad nedaugelis dešiniųjų politikų turi daugiau, nei paviršiaus supratimo apie šią problemą. Beveik visą administracinės valstybės tyrimą kairiųjų pažiūrų akademikai skyrė kairiųjų tikslams. Dauguma paskirtųjų, dirbusių respublikonų administracijose, tenkinosi tuo, kad sutaria su administracine valstybe – blaškosi politikos paraštėse, nebandydami pakeisti sistemos. Jų žinių trūkumas paskatino pateikti reformų pasiūlymus, kurie dažnai yra neaiškūs, neįgyvendinami ir neapgalvoti.

 

     Šiuolaikinėje eroje tik dvi komandos bandė pažaboti administracinės valstybės galią: Ronaldo Reagano personalo valdymo biuras, vadovaujamas Donaldo Devine'o, ir D. Trumpo Prezidento personalo biuras, vadovaujamas Johno McEntee. Abu vyrai tarp prezidentų paskirtųjų įtraukė politiškai lojalius ir ėmėsi svarbių žingsnių, siekdami apriboti karjeros biurokratų valdžią. P. Devine'as naudojo jėgos mažinimo pratybas – vyriausybės kalba apie atleidimus – kai darbuotojų darbas nebuvo iki galo geras. P. McEntee, be kitų priemonių, pradėjo panaikinti valstybės tarnybų apsaugą, skirtą politiką formuojantiems biurokratams. Abu vyrai pavertė biurokratijos kultūrą tinkama linkme, tačiau dėl riboto darbo laiko jie negalėjo užbaigti struktūrinių reformų, reikalingų ilgalaikiams pokyčiams.

 

     Vienintelis būdas, kaip kitas prezidentas gali išspręsti problemą visam laikui, yra surinkti tinkamą komandą nuo pat pradžių. Maždaug 4000 vykdomosios valdžios politinių postų būtina, bet nepakankama, kad būtų paskirti asmenys, įsipareigoję vykdyti prezidento darbotvarkę. Jam reikia Baltųjų rūmų, sudarytų iš žmonių, tiesiogiai žinančių, kaip veikia biurokratinė politika, ir turinčių noro panaudoti šias žinias, pertvarkant sistemą. 

 

Neužtenka turėti kompetentingų konservatorių. Kaip prezidentui, jums reikia žmonių, kurie galėtų pergudrauti biurokratus, sukurdami netradicinius būdus, kaip apeiti kliūtis, kurias jie statys.

 

     Yra dalykų, kuriuos šie darbuotojai turi žinoti. Pirma, kurios pozicijos yra kritiniai užspringimo taškai, o kurios, dažniausiai, yra ceremonijos. Reikia atpažinti, kada agentūra yra prarasta priežastis, kuri turėtų būti išdarinėta, palyginti su tuo, kada reikėtų atnaujinti personalą. Taip pat reikia žinoti, kurioms pareigoms reikalingas dalyko ekspertas, palyginti su politiškai nusiteikusiu paskirtuoju, kuriam gali trūkti kompetencijos.

 

     Darbuotojai turi gerai išmanyti 1978 m. Valstybės tarnybos reformos įstatymą, kuris gali būti naudojamas suvaldyti biurokratiją be Kongreso veiksmų. Taip pat labai svarbu žinoti, kaip pertvarkyti Baltųjų rūmų, kurie tapo savo besiplečiančia karjeros pareigūnų biurokratija, valdymą.

 

     Savo pranešimo apie prezidentavimą kalboje ponas Kennedy paaiškino, kad Vašingtone juokaujama, kad iš politinių paskirtų asmenų tikimasi, kad jie imsis veiksmų – o ne kels bangas – ir pasirašys bet kokią valstybės tarnautojų vykdomą politiką. Jo atsakymas buvo aiškus: „Suprantu pokštą, bet nemanau, kad tai juokinga“.

 

     Kitas prezidentas turi priimti tą mąstymą ir žmones, kurie jam pritaria.

     ---

     M. Baconas yra paveldo fondo prezidento perėjimo projekto vyresnysis patarėjas. Jis ėjo Baltųjų rūmų prezidento personalo operacijų direktoriaus pareigas 2020–2021 m.“ [1]

 

1. 2024 Candidates Run Against the Administrative State. Bacon, James. 
Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]. 01 June 2023: A.17.

2024 Candidates Run Against the Administrative State.

"The emerging question of the 2024 presidential election: Who will slay the federal leviathan? The beast goes by another name -- the administrative state -- and primary contenders are increasingly placing it front and center in their campaigns.

In his Twitter Spaces launch with Elon Musk, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis promised to "reconstitutionalize the executive branch and bring the administrative state to heel." Democratic candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. began his White House bid by saying he'd "take the CIA and shatter it into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds." Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy has a bold proposal to eliminate all civil-service protections for federal employees. And in Donald Trump's first speeches of the 2024 cycle, he claimed he is better positioned than his opponents to "root out the deep state" in 2025, having learned from his personnel mistakes during his first term.

What was once obscure has become obvious: Presidents today exercise a fraction of the executive-agency control that Franklin D. Roosevelt did when he and Congress created our modern government. The Covid lockdowns encouraged by Anthony Fauci and the recently uncovered coordination between the government and social-media platforms to censor what they arbitrarily deemed "misinformation" are fresh on everyone's mind. That these bureaucrats pursued their own agenda while Mr. Trump ostensibly had control over them proves that until you fix the administrative state, there's no guarantee that executive-branch policy will reflect the president's views.

The problem is that few politicians on the right have more than a surface-level understanding of this issue. Nearly all the scholarship on the administrative state has been done by left-wing academics for left-wing purposes. Most appointees who have served in Republican administrations have been content to get along with the administrative state -- tinkering on the margins of policy without trying to change the system. Their dearth of knowledge has led to reform proposals that are often vague, unfeasible and half-baked.

In the modern era, only two teams have attempted to curb the administrative state's power: Ronald Reagan's Office of Personnel Management, led by Donald Devine, and Mr. Trump's Office of Presidential Personnel, led by John McEntee. Both men installed political loyalists among the presidents' appointees and took major steps to curtail career bureaucrats' power. Mr. Devine used reduction-in-force exercises -- government-speak for layoffs -- when employees' work wasn't up to snuff. Mr. McEntee began eliminating civil-service protections for policy-making bureaucrats, among other measures. Both men moved the bureaucracy's culture in the right direction, but because of limited time in office they weren't able to finish the structural reforms for lasting changes.

The only way the next president can solve the problem for good is to assemble the right team from the beginning. It is necessary but insufficient to fill the executive branch's roughly 4,000 political positions with appointees committed to the president's agenda. He needs a White House made up of people with firsthand knowledge of how bureaucratic politics operate and the will to use that knowledge for a system overhaul. It isn't enough to have competent conservatives. As president you need people who can outsmart the bureaucrats by devising unconventional ways around the obstacles they'll erect.

There are things these operatives need to know. The first is which positions are critical choke points and which are mostly ceremonial. One must recognize when an agency is a lost cause that should be gutted vs. when it should be restaffed. One must also know which positions require a subject-matter expert vs. a politically aligned appointee who may lack expertise.

Staff must be well-versed in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, which can be used to rein in bureaucracy without congressional action. It's also essential to know how to restructure the management of the White House, which has become its own sprawling bureaucracy of career officials.

In his presidential announcement speech, Mr. Kennedy explained that the joke in Washington is that political appointees are expected to go through the motions -- not make waves -- and sign off on whatever policy the civil servants produce. His response was straightforward: "I get the joke, but I don't think it's funny."

The next president needs to embrace that mindset and the people who share it.

---

Mr. Bacon is a senior adviser to the Heritage Foundation's Presidential Transition Project. He served as White House director of operations for presidential personnel, 2020-21." [1]

1. 2024 Candidates Run Against the Administrative State. Bacon, James. 
Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]. 01 June 2023: A.17.